GMC v Dr Z (2017)

Edward Henry recently defended Dr Z before the MPTS on charges of dishonesty and alleged clinical incompetence.

Dr Z at the outset of the proceedings admitted dishonesty to an isolated charge and two instances where his clinical competence might have been sub-optimal. At Stage 1 all of the remaining allegations of dishonesty and deficient clinical performance were found not proved. At Stage 2 only the admitted dishonesty was deemed to be misconduct but the Tribunal accepted Edward’s submission that Dr Z was not currently impaired. The GMC then submitted that even though no impairment was found the Tribunal should impose a warning. The Tribunal upheld Edward’s submissions that given the exceptional circumstances of this case no warning was necessary. Edward was instructed by Carl Johnson of Stephensons.

Contact our experts for further advice

View profile for Edward Henry QCEdward Henry QC